A couple of days ago I was reading over one of David Zizer’s posts at Digital Pro Talk about charging prices for photos. I don’t really want to get too far into that, since I’m not really aiming at pro-level discussions here (hey, I blog for fun & a challenge, not cash). What struck me was when he started criticizing a photographer:

I recently saw a photographer at one of our local parks photographing two young children ages around 4 and 5. The photographer was using a wide angle lens that certainly did little to enhance the portrait – we’ve talked about why I use a long lens on all my portrait shoots [link]. He was also using a flash diffuser on his on-camera flash – no directional light – hence no beauty in the lighting in my opinion.

It’s just interesting to me: he immediately saw on-axis lighting.  My first thought (having not been there) was that he might be like I was a few years ago: using a softened on-axis flash to add fill.  Done lightly, you can pull of some almost strobist effects (without the coolness factor) by using natural light as the primary.

Just an interesting observation.  My perspective is doubtlessly focused more on that since I use the compact camera so much – I really lose the ability to use off-camera flashes.

Another thought that came to me – and again, far be it for me to know what was going on there – was that this probably wasn’t a portrait session.  Not in the traditional sense, at least.  I mean, maybe it was, but wouldn’t that be awful, a portrait with a wide-angle lens?  I almost wonder, though, if the goal was an environmental portrait – something that shows who they are and what they do.  I still agree, it could be done in a more flattering way.  But I’m not so sure I could judge that guy’s work.